Talk:Clemont's Chespin: Difference between revisions

Okay. First things first, just because a confirmed male Pokémon fell in love with a confirmed female Pokémon, it '''does not''' mean that any Pokémon that falls in love with that confirmed female Pokémon is a male. We '''will not''', repeat, '''will not''' base genders off of behavioral patterns like a crush. Genders are only confirmed via Attract/Cute Charm or is it is explicitly stated in the original Japanese episode. Secondly, BlisseyandtheAuaJets, no one implied that Purrloin was a transgender Pokémon, no one even said anything remotely close to that. The Purrloin acted feminine, but it '''does not''' mean we're implying that it is a transgender Pokémon. It acted feminine to the point that Meowth gained an attraction from it, and attraction comes in different forms, and the attraction we're thinking of is obviously not the same as yours.--[[User:Force Fire|<span style="color:#AB2813">'''F'''</span><span style="color:#C87365">orce</span>]][[User talk:Force Fire|<span style="color:#26649C">'''F'''</span><span style="color:#729ABF">ire</span>]] 12:48, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

:Okay look I don't care what anyone says in response to this because this needs to be said. The policy is flawed and so is the logic that the moderators use and that doesn't apply only to the gender situation. You guys need to accept the fact that you've been wrong about a Pokémon's "assumed" gender not being it's confirmed gender. A prime example being Serena's Pancham you said he wasn't confirmed male even though there was evidence that said he is and you wrong. You need to accept the fact that when a Pokémon with a confirmed gender has a crush on another Pokémon it indicates what the other Pokémon's gender could be. You have little to no evidence that supports your arguments while we do have evidence. Just accept the fact that the way you do things is flawed. [[User:Flain|Flain]] ([[User talk:Flain|talk]]) 17:15, 9 April 2016 (UTC)